Post-Church Christianity

Post-Church Christianity

If the Church is as I suppose, dead and still walking, what does Christianity look like in the future?

If you look around the crowd at any church I’ve ever attended you see gray and white hair. The average age of my current church congregation is somewhere well over 55. With growth rates at next to zero, in 15 years’ time there will be no one left.

That’s not an unusual opinion among analysts either, nor does it appear to be just the case for just a subset of the Christian world.

The simple fact is, unless something changes, and changes drastically, in 15 years there will be no more Christian churches. So, what is to be done?

Should we be resigned to failure, should we try more of the same?

There seem to be two camps forming on the issue, there’s the conservative camp which is doubling-down on tradition and then there’s the liberal camp that looks to be dispensing with the moral aspect of religion in favor of the social aspect.

Both are bleeding numbers, especially in the under 40 demographics. As far as the socially oriented modern churches go, it could be argued that they are bleeding out faster in many cases than the uber traditional alternatives.

In my opinion both seem to be viewing the situation on entirely the wrong plane. 

The 20-45 age group let’s say, is anything about silent about what it is they are looking for and are opposed to. This group is perhaps the most vocal generation of all time about such things. If by nothing else but social media their voice is measured it’s loud and clear, but religious institution don’t seem to be getting the message. It’s as if this generation is speaking clearly and precisely but in a foreign language.

Ironically, at least from my 3rd person perspective, the issue is precisely that the under 45s are clearly and precisely opposing and rejecting the language spoken by the religious institutions.

This is no small problem, that should be clear already by the lack of positive results, but even if that is not proof enough for you, where there is no conversation there can be no understanding. Whether that lack of communication be intended or unintended by means of a language barrier, the lack of communication means zero chance of progress.

If you’re curious what I mean by language, it’s not English or Spanish or any such thing, it’s the Tools and Methods by which we transfer Ideas between individuals. The Christian religion though somewhat flexible in past centuries has become rather ossified over the past century. It’s abundantly obvious to the attentive observer that the religious world has been using the same arguments and structures for quite a long time. Some of those things like the hierarchical organization structure has become a staple of the religious organization. The format of how a Christian service is conducted is so inflexible that even from the far-left flanks of liberal ‘doctrine free’ evangelical churches to the far right of Traditional American, Doctrine-Based denominations, a casual visitor can recognize them both as more-or-less Christian churches. 

As a regular attendee of a more religious and doctrine-based church, I see more of one side than the other, but I do interact regularly with close acquaintances on both sides.

It’s easy, very easy actually, so see this as the problem of the new generation. You could make the argument, that ‘we’ve been saying the same things for ages, and they’re the ones changing the language’, that would be a valid assessment. That said, it IS the prerogative of the current generations to adapt and modify their world, and the previous generations certainly aren’t on some moral pedestal of having abdicated their chance to change the world.

So, while it IS the newer generations that aren’t listening to the old words, it’s the older generations’ fault that they are not getting the message through.

What language, in contrast to the religious language, do the newer generations speak? If we as the older generations (of which I do consider myself) are to learn to speak the new language, what is it?

That’s not an easy answer to nail down, partially because just like translating between spoken languages, sometimes there’s just not the right words to use.

There are, however, some Ideas and Concepts about the language that I can translate.

The 1st idea is that this generation is interested in learning things. It’s often said of millennials that they are disinterested, but that is ENTIRELY untrue. This generation has actually invented or at the very least, re-invented from antiquity, the Long-Form conversation. Through the medium of Podcasting, 1-3 and sometimes 6 hour conversations on a particular group of subjects are listened to intently. Left, center or right, people are attending to long, in depth and nuanced discussions about the nature of life. It would truly surprise some of you to hear the nature of these conversations because they are FAR more morally oriented than seems to be assumed.

There’s a growing appreciation for hearing-out an entire view-point, and then countering with another long, and in depth rebuttal. These conversations aren’t all one sided Ideologically either, and there is a strong respect between the opposing views depending on the level of calmness with which the thinkers share their views. It’s a highly civilized and chivalrous endeavor.

Figures like Joe Rogan (a comedian), Jordan Peterson (a social psychologist), Sam Harris ( a Rationalist-Athiest), Bret Wienstien (an evolutionary biologist), Douglas Murray (a social journalist and author), Lex Friedman (a Marxist Russian immigrant) just to name a few are constantly engaging in civilized open discussions and lectures about the nature of life. Despite the WIDE array of view-points, MILLIONS of people listen to these hours-long discussions regularly. The difference between these long-form conversations and a religious sermon, say, is a DISTINCT lack of Dogma. Between these thinkers, (and their status is largely based on this very factor) is an intellectual honesty and a visibly applied belief that they do not have THE answer to an issue. Rather, they offer their view, and then back it up with data. They also don't disregard another's view just because of group identity, people of opposing idealogical persuasions still have the discussion, Marxists and Capitalists, Straights and Gays, it doesn't matter because the goal is to explore the nature of life. Truth is being searched for and no stone is left unturned. That's a massive amount of humility and intellectual honesty.

I believe it’s this intellectual honesty that is the crux of the issue that divides the ‘churches’ from this generations’ strong desire to learn things. The church has long-since identified itself as THE one that has THE answers. Despite whether or not that is true, and there IS evidence that it IS true, constantly boasting about how CORRECT you are, does not invite real conversation.  It also justifies the church in never reevaluating their positions. As such, the church becomes that ‘old boomer’ who is not willing to answer questions, only to give answers.

If the church is to learn the language of the new generations, they must first practice humility. Engage in real conversations with real people. Be simultaneously open to challenge and equally accepting of the possibility you don’t have the best answer. Without that intellectual honesty that the ‘church’ is made of fallible humans who project their own meaning onto the Gospel, there will BE NO conversation.

The 2nd concept about this generations’ language is that they speak in terms of personal responsibility.

How many times have you heard millennials referred to as entitled? While there are certainly some squeaky wheels, MILLIONS of people under 45 especially are desperately searching for individual purpose. The previous generations’ education system taught them they were all ‘special’, but when they grew up they really did see through the lie. Things like casual sex even, are absolutely seen by this generation as morally degrading and detrimental. I kid you not, despite what’s on tv and in the legacy media, this generation is wise to the faults of the sexual revolution and the women’s movement. There is a massive and passionate searching for, as I heard a person say yesterday, ‘what else did we throw away that was important?’. The problem, the reason that churches can’t be there to answer the question is because they were complicit in the lies. The church was a part of the big lies of the 20th century. The churches taught too much tradition and collectivism, the churches abused too many people, the churches supported too many corrupt political entities, the church was found with other peoples’ money and other peoples’ wives. They are view as part of the problem, and that’s a valid condemnation.

The only way to engage this demographic is to jettison the baggage, and drop the idea of church. This idea that we need a classical service structure where a higher than the audience level speaker is preaching to a crowd, where we sing traditional songs and have traditional rites will not be visited by anyone who see that we were once part of the problem.

That doesn’t mean we have to get rid of the Gospel or the Sabbath or any such thing, in-fact people WANT to discuss such things, but they want to be a part of the building process. People want to own their beliefs, they want to feel personally responsible for their relationships, INCLUDING their relationship with God. Quite frankly this generation doesn’t know God, He has to be introduced to them, and that’s not such an easy thing to do when you fly the flag of ‘the enemy’. If we are to introduce this generation to God, whom they are actually searching for, It will have to be in their own language and in a context they are familiar with.

We need to cut the reins, church thinks it holds the reins of the Gospel machine, it doesn’t. The head of the Church is Christ, not man. The world needs God, and It needs someone to introduce them to Him. The history of the church in as much as we can look back through history and see who successfully carried the truth to the next generation has always been the people who were willing to separate from tradition. All the way from Abraham, to Christ to us today, the people of God let go of What Is and are led by the Spirit to What Could Be. The people of God have always been the people who COULD HAVE continued doing what they were doing, but acted on Faith to do something new. We have the historical perspective to look back and see them as having made the correct choice and taken the correct paths, but they never had that. They only had a fork in the road and look something like, Things aren’t optimal here, I can either go straight, into more of the same, or I can follow this new path. 

We are at a crossroads, the church is dead and in 15 more years and the transmission of the Gospel could die with it, we can either go straight forward and let the inevitable happen, or we can take that gospel to the people; we could see the evil ahead and avoid it.

I love church, it served me well, and I will miss it greatly, but it’s outlived it’s function, it’s now time to preach The Gospel.

-Seth 7-1-22